The Complex Framing of Feminism in Online Articles from The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates how CBC frames feminism in their online news content. Two research questions guide this inquiry. First, when does feminism become newsworthy to CBC? Second, how is feminism framed in online news articles from CBC? Both content analysis and critical discourse analysis are employed to answer these questions. The analysis is conducted using framing theory as the primary theoretical approach. This research builds upon the foundational work of Kaitlynn Mendes on the framing of feminism in print newspapers that largely assessed whether coverage was positive or negative in nature. While drawing inspiration from this literature, this project adds a novel perspective by examining both an online and Canadian context. One hundred and fifty news articles relating to feminism were collected from CBC’s website for analysis. Results reveal the overall theme of complexity and the frames of controversy/containment and diversity/intersectionality which define how CBC represents feminism. These results demonstrate the positive-negative binary does not accurately summarize how feminism fares in CBC News content. Instead, we are left with both a complex image of feminism as a social movement and a complex framing of feminism by CBC organised around the frames of controversy/containment and intersectionality/diversity. This framing characterises the manner in which CBC supports feminism but also contains it within certain boundaries. Overall, this work adds to the existing literature on feminism in the news and augments our understanding of how feminism is not only viewed by, but fashioned, shaped, and moulded in our society by trusted and powerful media sources.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".